The original reason for the current naming scheme was precisely to avoid
long names.
But I'm cool with the revised naming scheme +1
Are we planning on reverting to one cvs?
I think the org.apache.avalon.{subproject}.* all in one CVS but with
multiple jars and release cycles should work fine.
Charles
Peter Donald wrote:
>
> At 08:29 26/4/01 -0400, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> >> > org.apache.avalon.framework
> >> > org.apache.avalon.excalibur
> >> > org.apache.avalon.phoenix
> >> > org.apache.avalon.cornerstone
> >> > org.apache.avalon.logkit
> >>
> >> +1 for me. I thought of it earlier but was not willing to influence your
> debats
> >> about branding Avalon. IMHO this would complete the branding of Avalon.
> >
> >+1 from me. It solves all of our concerns and promotes Avalon as the
> >container for everything.
> >
> >This is a relatively easy change, and it will be easy enough for the
> >conversion script to adjust to.
>
> works for me ... wont have time to do it for a bit I don't think though ..
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
> | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
> | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
> | everyone gets busy on the proof." |
> | - John Kenneth Galbraith |
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
